Re: Confidentiality (was - Re: Nomcom feedback to appointees not up for renewal)
Stephen Farrell <stephen.farrell@cs.tcd.ie> Wed, 01 April 2015 20:02 UTC
Return-Path: <stephen.farrell@cs.tcd.ie>
X-Original-To: ietf@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: ietf@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id EDC2E1A8825 for <ietf@ietfa.amsl.com>; Wed, 1 Apr 2015 13:02:04 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -4.21
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-4.21 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_MED=-2.3, T_RP_MATCHES_RCVD=-0.01] autolearn=ham
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([4.31.198.44]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id Qshfs3trKyyt for <ietf@ietfa.amsl.com>; Wed, 1 Apr 2015 13:02:03 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from mercury.scss.tcd.ie (mercury.scss.tcd.ie [134.226.56.6]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher AECDH-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 255911A8AA7 for <ietf@ietf.org>; Wed, 1 Apr 2015 13:02:03 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by mercury.scss.tcd.ie (Postfix) with ESMTP id D09A6BEED; Wed, 1 Apr 2015 21:02:01 +0100 (IST)
X-Virus-Scanned: Debian amavisd-new at scss.tcd.ie
Received: from mercury.scss.tcd.ie ([127.0.0.1]) by localhost (mercury.scss.tcd.ie [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id zUhtncJ1ynMr; Wed, 1 Apr 2015 21:02:00 +0100 (IST)
Received: from [10.87.48.73] (unknown [86.46.29.244]) by mercury.scss.tcd.ie (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id BE375BEE9; Wed, 1 Apr 2015 21:02:00 +0100 (IST)
Message-ID: <551C4EB8.6070507@cs.tcd.ie>
Date: Wed, 01 Apr 2015 21:02:00 +0100
From: Stephen Farrell <stephen.farrell@cs.tcd.ie>
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:31.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/31.5.0
MIME-Version: 1.0
To: Brian E Carpenter <brian.e.carpenter@gmail.com>, "Livingood, Jason" <Jason_Livingood@cable.comcast.com>, Mary Barnes <mary.h.barnes@gmail.com>, Dave Crocker <dcrocker@bbiw.net>
Subject: Re: Confidentiality (was - Re: Nomcom feedback to appointees not up for renewal)
References: <5513FE6B.7090405@dcrocker.net> <00d101d067ce$80f30b00$82d92100$@olddog.co.uk> <20150326142810.DDCC61A014B@ietfa.amsl.com> <CABmDk8=A8hMrr_K9S98UPkpFGX80xdRkdPrriiirT=_wFAe0og@mail.gmail.com> <55142B2A.2080301@dcrocker.net> <CABmDk8nh=NL7Js-b3k_4hC1fRDt-Gp+7YFF8tRWAZEXKcQxw3w@mail.gmail.com> <D1416FD8.FE897%jason_livingood@cable.comcast.com> <551C3F07.9070802@gmail.com>
In-Reply-To: <551C3F07.9070802@gmail.com>
OpenPGP: id=D66EA7906F0B897FB2E97D582F3C8736805F8DA2; url=
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
Archived-At: <http://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/ietf/6NYk_YpHCl01n7v8-LzFpZcuTuA>
Cc: IETF Discussion <ietf@ietf.org>
X-BeenThere: ietf@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15
Precedence: list
List-Id: IETF-Discussion <ietf.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/ietf>, <mailto:ietf-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/ietf/>
List-Post: <mailto:ietf@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:ietf-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf>, <mailto:ietf-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 01 Apr 2015 20:02:05 -0000
Hiya, On 01/04/15 19:55, Brian E Carpenter wrote: > We're smart enough to make a 360 review process almost completely > automated and genuinely anonymous. A bunch of iesg folk liked this idea so we've put it on the agenda for our retreat in early May. We'll get back after that. If folks have more specific suggestions then I guess send 'em here to the general list, or to some IESG member if you prefer that. S.
- Nomcom feedback to appointees not up for renewal Dave Crocker
- Re: Nomcom feedback to appointees not up for rene… Ted Lemon
- RE: Nomcom feedback to appointees not up for rene… Adrian Farrel
- Re: Nomcom feedback to appointees not up for rene… Terry Manderson
- RE: Nomcom feedback to appointees not up for rene… Michael StJohns
- Re: Nomcom feedback to appointees not up for rene… Randy Bush
- Re: Nomcom feedback to appointees not up for rene… George Michaelson
- Re: Nomcom feedback to appointees not up for rene… Andrew Sullivan
- Re: Nomcom feedback to appointees not up for rene… Mary Barnes
- Re: Nomcom feedback to appointees not up for rene… Spencer Dawkins at IETF
- Re: Nomcom feedback to appointees not up for rene… Michael Richardson
- Re: Nomcom feedback to appointees not up for rene… Michael Richardson
- Re: Nomcom feedback to appointees not up for rene… Kathleen Moriarty
- Confidentiality (was - Re: Nomcom feedback to app… Dave Crocker
- Re: Nomcom feedback to appointees not up for rene… Spencer Dawkins at IETF
- Re: Nomcom feedback to appointees not up for rene… Bob Hinden
- Re: Nomcom feedback to appointees not up for rene… Ted Lemon
- Re: Nomcom feedback to appointees not up for rene… Ted Lemon
- Re: Nomcom feedback to appointees not up for rene… t.p.
- Re: Nomcom feedback to appointees not up for rene… Lee Howard
- Re: Nomcom feedback to appointees not up for rene… Michael Richardson
- Re: Nomcom feedback to appointees not up for rene… Fred Baker (fred)
- Re: Nomcom feedback to appointees not up for rene… Fred Baker (fred)
- Re: Confidentiality (was - Re: Nomcom feedback to… Mary Barnes
- Re: [eX-bulk] : Re: Nomcom feedback to appointees… Christopher LILJENSTOLPE
- Re: Confidentiality (was - Re: Nomcom feedback to… Livingood, Jason
- Re: Confidentiality (was - Re: Nomcom feedback to… Brian E Carpenter
- Re: Confidentiality (was - Re: Nomcom feedback to… Stephen Farrell